Achievement Discussion - April - The Month of the Arcade Spoiler

With the painstakingly slow month of April behind us in terms of releases, and more importantly, whoring those achievements, it’s time to reflect on the few lists that we saw last month without forgetting to turn our attention to what we’ll be doing throughout May. Of course, it’s that time of the month again (no, not that one) ... Achievement Discussion time! As usual, we’ll start with the new lists and then mosey on over to how we’ll be getting our points in May.

April, as far as new lists goes, can officially be deemed, “month of the arcade spoiler.” The release of lists like Gunstar Heroes, Phantasy Star II, Sonic the Hedgehog 3, Marvel v Capcom 2, Shinobi, Comix Zone and Altered Beast pretty much gave us our first bit of confirmation that these titles were Xbox Live Arcade bound. That being said, it also uncovered SEGA’s evil plan to release the games twice seeing as a lot of those aforementioned titles were already released in a compilation pack the other month. Despite that, in reality you can’t grumble as it’s simply good business and come on, you’re not forced into buying them, are you? If you are, see your local Trading Standards officer as it’s likely that SEGA aren’t playing by the same rulebook as us mere mortals. Releasing them separately does allow people who’ve not yet picked up the compilation pack, to pick and choose which games they wish to play, although this is an expensive method. It also means that super achievement whores can buy them twice and get a massive boost in points. If they do release them all of them separately, players effectively have the chance to earn an incredible 10,800 points just by playing SEGA classics (49 Genesis games & the compilation pack).

Juggling in a fighting game? Result!

Under the main spotlight this month, we’ll pay particular attention to the achievement lists for Marvel vs Capcom 2 and Red Faction: Guerilla which seems to be suffering the same delusions of grandeur that Chronicles of Riddick recently suffered from. Marvel vs Capcom 2 is a fairly ... generic list and requires plenty of online play. The themed achievements are a nice touch though, requiring players to create teams consisting of characters from that relevant stable (Street Fighter, the Avengers, Darkstalkers & X-Men). Not incredibly mind blowing, but not terrible. They’re run-of-the-mill if you must.

The problem with Red Faction: Guerilla’s achievement list in short, is that it’s crap. For some weird and wonderful reason, Volition want you to amass 100,000 online experience points, win (yes, I said win) 250 ranked matches and get 5,000 kills in what is destined to be another multiplayer arena that just doesn’t cut it against the big boys of today. Thanks ... but no thanks, especially if the Beta was anything to go by. The list is just pretty poor throughout and it’s hard to believe that this development team created some of the amusing Saints Row 2 achievements and had the sense of humour to include an Ostrich as a weapon in the final Red Faction build. A lack of care maybe? Who knows ... We just know that the list is generic, unbalanced and devoid of any sort of originality.

As far as May’s releases go, we don’t actually have much to rabbit on about there (lucky you!) because, quite simply put, we’ve not got the lists yet for most of the more mainstream titles. And I’m not about to sit here are discuss Hannah Montana’s Euro release ... well, not in public anyway. We can however take a look at the UFC 2009 Undisputed list after seeing the impressive demo too, as it hits the stores in May.

I want that "Flying Mouthpieces" achievement!

As far as the UFC 2009 Undisputed list goes ... well, we’re not convinced. In fact, we’re a little disappointed. On the one hand, the list looks pretty fun ... trying to win fights within 20 seconds, and winning by using submissions and no striking, and winning by striking with no grappling, which not only could be fun, but they are a great way to encourage fighters to learn more styles. But on the other hand though, the list’s balance is absolutely terrible. If you want to fully complete UFC 2009, you’ll have to spend a large amount of your time on Live, in fact, a ridiculous amount of time will be lost online. You’ll be expected to rack up 100 online ranked wins and reach level 50 on your way to securing the 470 points that are available there. They’re not even original online achievements either; excuse me while I drone on but you get awarded points for 1 win, 15 wins, 30 wins, 50 wins, 100 wins, 15 submission wins, 15 knockout wins and yada yada. Shame really ... although the secret achievements do actually show a little originality (knocking mouthpiece 3 metres, dominating all 3 replay scenes, watching the Octagon girl cutscene 15 times (like you needed an excuse!). When will developers learn that multiplayer achievements are the devil’s spawn?

Just before we move on, we thought we’d lavish some praise on Fable 2’s new achievements for the See the Future DLC (due May 12th) which look absolutely fantastic again. Kudos goes out to Lionhead there. Unfortunately, (or rather fortunately for me) I’ll be at E3 at the beginning of next month so there will be no achievement discussion published then. However, normal service resumes at the beginning of July where we should have a few treats to work through then.

On to the mail bag then and a big thanks to those who submitted questions this month, however, I’m only going to use one of them and mingle in a current talking point topic in as the other one.

First up, Filter X 2007 asks:If Microsoft decided that 'boosting' achievements goes against the terms and use of XBL (like a few people have been talking about lately) would x360a.org remove the gamer boosting threads from each games forum?

Marcus was one of the ones whose gamerscore was reset

I’m presuming that the whole Gears of War 2 mass gamerscore resetting triggered this question and it’s a valid one in some senses and it all falls down to whether boosting is against the terms and conditions of Xbox Live, which according to Stephen Tolouse, Microsoft’s official banhammer, it is not. He writes on his blog, “We tend to issue resets for a very clear set of actions that users take to get achievements without even playing the game. So those of you boosters, if you’re not glitching or doing other things in violation of the Terms of Use, don’t worry.” That clearly indicates that Microsoft, or Tolouse anyway, don’t see boosting as a breach of the terms ... and we agree. Not only do you fulfil the achievement’s criteria, “kill 250 people online” but you also put the time and effort into do it, rather than flicking a switch and unlocking it. To answer your question though, if boosting was suddenly treated as a breach of the terms and conditions of Xbox Live, then yes, we would remove them, but we’re fairly positive that scenario would never happen. Great question though.

And finally, from x360a’s inner sanctum asks:

So then ... what do you think of these new achievement rules? Think they’ll hold up or do you think we’re destined to be writing about new ones this time next year?

Saints Row 2 DLC is shortest yet

Good question x360a ... have a cookie. The new rules as discussed by Alan in April and confirmed by numerous sources around the web, do seem to carry good intentions, although you can’t help but think they are a stop gap, until someone else wants to break them ... as was apparent with the first set. The only saving grace with the new rules is that they are more downloadable content friendly which the first ones were not. That says more about the state of play of DLC than it does about anything else. When Microsoft first announced the “official” achievement rules, as posted by the gone- and-not-forgotten, Gamerscoreblog, downloadable content was not a current trend and the current change in rules only goes to correct the short sightedness of those original rules. Sure they allowed for 250 extra points for retail titles, but when developers were using them on one pack of content, you knew it was only a matter of time until the rules felt the strain. Why? Because achievements linked to downloadable content sells content. Simple as. How many people would have played the Ultor Exposed pack if there were no achievements? Exactly!

So do we think they’ll hold up this time? Stands a good chance. Are we destined for version 3.0 this time next year? Wouldn’t have thought so. Do we like them? Well, we’d rather have some sort of guidelines in place than none, although these do seem to be a tad more unrestrictive than the ones we’re used to, which could ultimately take the phenomenon of downloadable content and achievements to another level ... and not in a good way.

That’s it till July then folks. Remember as always, questions for the mail bag are accepted via PM, Twitter, e-mail or written on a paper airplane and flown my way. We’ll leave you with the crème de la crème and dregs of the barrel of this month’s achievements.

Top of the pile this month is UFC with one of its secret achievement (as discovered by the trophy list); Wanted: Flying Mouthpieces. After playing the demo this month, we discovered that there was something so ultimately satisfying in trying to knock your opponent’s mouthpiece as far as you could with that killer blow. An achievement with thought, originality and one that surely will be an “oh awesome ... did you see that?” moment when you finally unlock it. Big finishes are always a winner in our books.

It was close this month and any one of five achievements could have taken this award home, and funnily enough, those five achievements came from two games: UFC 2009 Undisputed and Red Faction: Guerilla. In the end, we decided to give it to Red Faction simply because the two UFC achievements in the running carried a lot more points with them, making the ridiculous effort needed to gain them that little bit more rewarding. Either way, the Black Belt and Red Belt achievements from UFC and the War Veteran, Courier of Pain and Disaster Area achievements from Red Faction: Guerilla are all lacklustre, unoriginal and bland achievements.

i like online achievements...... it takes skill and skill is something to be achieved which is generally the whole point. if you disagree then its blatently obvious your not a good or skilled player you are a mere average or below and should accept that this goes above your level of brilliance

and that because of that, you dont deserve it and shouldnt complain as its for those who can win 100 games online to be proud that they achieved something others cant, surely thats better than something everybody can do?

online achievments dont necessarily reuqire skill. playing 100 games doesnt make you skillful. it all dpends onhte type of acheivement. if online acheivments are included they should be to entice me in to the multiplayer, get me playing it so that i can see what its all about. i thought that the orange box [one of the best sets of acheivemnts ever] did a great job with TF2. It made me paly all the classes a little bit, so I got a feel for them all, then I chose my favourite class and went for 1000 kills, which wasnt a mountain and it wasnt over in 30 minutes, nice variety and length tothe acheivements

dont ask me to play 100 matches of every gametype on every map, its silly.

and for the love of god, dont lock it down to ranked, make it ranked, player or local. that way everybody gets

It requires skill in some games. But in most games there is nobody playing so you can't get them. Even if you're only trying to get time or a number of matches like in katamari. I played online a lot and spend most of the time waiting in the lobby, because nobody was laying the damn thing.

Now the same with riddick. I would love to play it online all the time, because it reminds me of TimeSplitters and is very fast and fun. But all the time I only find 3-4 matches. So if you want to get an achievement that requires playing a secific game type you're screwed. I never once saw a capture the flag match in the last 7 days when I was online. And sometimes you can't even find a normal death match.

That is what pisses us of. You have to boost or get a friend in some games (especially older

I agree with number 1. One of my friends is working his butt off trying to get his level 100 in Gears of War 2, but he told me he'd like to call Microsoft and say "I don't know about you guys, but I like to complete my games. I think you guys could be making a lot more money if you stopped releasing as much DLC. There are so many games I'd like to pay $60 to get, but whenever I finish my Gears of War achievements, you guys release new ones and more DLC so I have to pay $10 for DLC as opposed to $60 for a new game, and I don't play others games until the one I'm currently playing is done with."

To be honest, I think anyone (and most of this site probably falls under this category) who moans about more achievements coming for games they've already completed are utterly pathetic.

Completionist or not, if you moan that achievements are added to DLC to help give that DLC more to do, make it funner and reward you for doing things in it, your pathetic. I don't care if it screws your 1000 points up as not being 100% complete - WHO CARES. You 100% completed the original 1000, feeling you HAVE to buy DLC just for some achievements above that is downright sad. Like the new Gears achievement for Rank 100. For those of us who love Gears, it's something fantastic to work towards and it's a great achievement. For those who don't, you'll never get it (unless you glitch it) and that's a good

thing. It means that a true Gearhead will get all the achievements, but the original 1000 is still more than attainable for anyone. Isn't that who is going to be buying the DLC in the first place, people who want more maps? Exactly.

Stop whining it screws up your precious completion ratios. DLC is seperate from the original 1000 - if you don't like a game or don't want to play the DLC, leave yourself at 1000 and no-one else thinks any less of it. Anyone who buys DLC purely because they HAVE to complete all the achievements, whether they want the DLC or not, is far sadder to me.

Number 9 and 10 saved me from saying what I wanted to say about those 1000 completionist rejects. Amen man!!! If DLC bugs you rejects so much, go unlock your gay little tropies on the ps3!! I'm sure they wont bother adding on to their shitty games. DLC FTW!!! Keep them commin!

The only issue I have with DLC is that the prices are simply not scaled well. Lionhead got it right with See the Future at 560, even if it is as short as Knothole, it is priced more reasonably and will likely sell far MORE as a result.

As far as the multiplayer hubub is concerned, just look to Bungie or Infinity Ward for guidance, Halo 3's multiplayer achies are BRILLIANT and rather easy to get.Hell Bungie would kill me with laughter if they threw in a "Mute 1000 players" or "Commit suicide with your own Sniper Rifle" achievement. Call of Duty 4 didn't have ANY, proving you can have a great MP experience without any achies at all.

i really dont understand all the complaining. at 9 and 10 right on. i agree with everything. if developers would stop the dlc gamers would probably stop playing the games after 1000gs. if everyone says they are such achievement whores they wouldnt wast their time playing a great game online like gears or halo if there wernt anymore achievements to get. dlc lets gamers continue to play the games they love while having something a little extra to work towards. bring me more dlc!

Completionists Completionists Completionists Completionists Completionists! I am So sick Of Hearing These Whinny A$$ People. They Are Ruining The Gameing World. You know what back in the day it took time to Finish a Game, And we didnt have achivements or online leader boards. It tooke me forver to finish Mario and I had a blast tryen to do it! I love the DLC it keeps the game Fresh And again if it wound up on a disk at Gamestop you would buy it! Completionists Need to grow up and stop acting like wussy's that stil live at there parents house.I cant tell you how many games I have traded in to get new one casue the ecomomy Sucks A$$!

But! You dont see my Crying that I didnt get to get 100% you know why casue when the game I traded goes down in price I will go back get it and play it some more. I was Highly disapointd that L4D update didnt have achivements So I traded it in and put it down on Terminator. Fallout 3 Man the map was huge as is and they keep pumping out DLC! Why casue it keeps the game fresh. I siad this Bfor and I wil Say it again I am a Ol Skool Gamer I owned a Atari when I was 4 years old I am Now 29. I am seeing a Huge downfall in Gamers! Gamers are Rebels. We were Generation X REBELS OF GAMEING. Grow a Pair Or Shut The Hell Up!

I used to hate DLC that adds points, but now... So what if it screws up my 100%? 1000GS is still 1000, 100% complete originally out of the box. DLC keeps games going, sure, its a way for companies to make money, but it also allows companis to support and enhance their games post release.

As for riddickulous (get it?) multiplayer achievements, I hope developers learn to stop it. Seriously, look at our forum, there are many people who said they didnt buy Riddick because of Multiplayer achievements. Me included. ITs actually costing them sales. I dont think anyone would not buy a game because there ARENT any (or arent any 10000 kill) multiplayer achievements. Most people who would get them are boosters anyway, who sometimes even ruin the fun of those trying to get a legit game going, espec

especially in games where multi is not the main focus and clears out quickly (ie, Dark Sector - very difficult ot get a normal ranked game going, and when you do get into one, i find its more often boosters than not). So devs - stop with crazy MP achievments - its actually costing you less sales... Im pretty much avoiding games wiht lots of MP achieves - when i can get a good single player game instead for the same price? For example, instead of Riddick, i could get Ninja Blade or Godfather 2 (which has MP, but all SP achieves, good job for once, EA)

It was a boring month for games in general. Thankfully, it gave gamers a chance to go back and get older, cheap games for Gamer Score. I decided to pick up Alone in the Dark for $20, and I must say that I'm having a fun time as well as a quick points boost.

Kudos to #13. COD showed everyone that ppl will still play those games online, without even trying to get achievements. Other than World at War and their 2 0 point achievements. Also, Halo got it right when they first released it all the online achievements were 5 points. This makes sure players can still get 900-950G without playing much online.

9+10 thank you for taking the time out for that. Its was great. Anyway online achievements are great. It takes skill and ppl who don't have skill boost for it.I mean wats the point of a game if your always worrying if u skipped an achievement or not. Enjoy the game. Achievements later. The only crappy online achievements are like 5 win streaks in nba 2k9. Besides everything else is do-able if u have any skill

I've been a gamer for nearly 20 years, and throughout that time there are a few things that have remained constant for me.

I always like to complete a game as much as a possibly can, I really loved it when a game gave a visible completion percentage (like in the Donkey Kong series on SNES), and I like to immerse myself in games and fully experience the story. Really these two things go hand in hand, by completing a game 100% I know I have not missed anything and that I have seen all the game has to offer.

With the advent of achievements on the Xbox 360, I looked at them as if they were a completion percentage. I thought to myself, "If I get all the achievements, that is 100% and I know I haven't missed anything!" I originally liked the idea of achievements, but recently that has b

I'll just come out and say it, I know many people will disagree with me on this, but this is my opinion; I hate online multiplayer. Especially ranked games. Sportsmanship is dead in this day and age, more so online than anywhere else. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't find getting killed and ridiculed by people who devote hours upon hours of their lives to one game to be fun. I despise little kids who list themselves as "underground" gamers to look cool and then squeal like schoolgirls when they kill me. If I can just play private matches with my friends then that is fine, but I can't stand ranked. Because I want to have fun when playing a game I am not allowed to get achievements for it? That sounds like a broken syst

broken system to me. Requiring skill is one thing, I like difficult games which require skill, but things like glitching and spawn-camping are not skill. Another gripe I have with multiplayer is the amount of focus that is put on it in today's market. When online multiplayer first came around it wasn't in most games. The average game was at least 10+ hours of playtime in single-player, with most being longer. Now, the average single-player campaign is only 6+ hours, and nearly every game released has a multiplayer mode of some sort, which is usually a last minute addition that was tacked on and is miraculously sub-par. What I would love to see in a game with a good, balanced multiplayer mode which anyone can enjoy casually. I have well over 200 games, I don't want to be required to

be required to play a single one of them for months just to build the skill required to play multiplayer competitively.

As for DLC, I really don't have a problem with DLC or with DLC having achievements. I like DLC as long as it is good, and adds something to the story of the game. The problem I have is that most DLC released is overpriced, and there is a lot of DLC being pushed out that is purely there to make money and doesn't really add anything to the game that it is for. Pushing out a worthless DLC with 100 gamerscore attached to it and charging $10+ is not ok.

I understand business, I know everyone in the gaming industry is out to make a buck, but I just wish they wouldn't ONLY be out to make a buck. Is it really impossible to make something that is profitable to a company

On a side note since I am ranting, I also hate the NXE, particularly the marketplace. I've sick of seeing nothing but Rock Band, Guitar Hero, and Lips when I look at new releases, and I really don't understand why every single thing I try to click on has to take a full 60 seconds or longer to load. Honestly, all things considered, I have been seriously considering getting a PS3 so that I have something else to play when I get frustrated with Microsoft, and if you knew my stance on Sony and the PS3, you would understand how bad it is for Microsoft that someone like me is considering that.

Wow... a 5 post comment? Though i do agree with 90% of what you said, Seiryu, thanks for taking the time to write all that out! You really adressed many of the concerns us 360 gamers/achievement hunters have with games these days.

Totally agree, I as going to try and get Riddicks online cheevos, legit, but the games plagued with quitters, and of course they quit, it dosnt count anything.

I should have near 500kills by now and about 20 wins, reality is I hav 56 kills and 1, yes one win.

Soulution make online cheevos (if we have to have them) 0GS, Count everything on the fly , and not at the end of a match, and finnaly when setting targets, take a step back smell the roses, and honestly answer , is the online element of my game realy good enough to make people want to get this target.

Multiplayer achievements also seem to be the laziest to design, eg: Kill XXX many players, play XXX many games. Why can't developers bring some of the imagination seen in their offline counterparts to them?

i think online achievements should be removed as some people cant afford live so they only have a few games they can complete fully. or the extra 250 that games are allowed should be used for the multiplayer achievements. more and more games go over 1250 now anyway soit doesnt matter.

@41 - Yeah me too, but I wasn't a fan of the online aspect when I played the beta. Again part of the problem of onerous multiplayer achievements ... putting them in a game that will have a small online community and will be pretty sub-standard/mediocre, etc.

Sounds like everybody here wants easy AVATAR 1000 point games. LOL. LAME!!!! I enjoy HARD achievements. I like time consuming ones too, becuase knowing cry like yourselves wont be able to atain them. I'm talking about the completionist not you regular fun game playing dudes. Peace

@13 - True. People complaining about online achievements, and Infinity Ward obviously feels the same. Not one online achievement, and it has one of, if not the, best online mode of any game. Online achievements are annoying, but the only reason their annoying to me is the fact that a developer half heartedly puts in a shitty online which nobody plays and expects you to go around playing hundreds of matches and killing thousands of people. Ridiculous.

@ #1 Totally agree. They're using achievements as selling points and bait now, rather than as achievements. It's sad and annoying. Before I buy any new game now, I think "how much will the company milk this game with DLC and extra achievements? Is this a game I want to spend $10-$30 more on after I buy it for DLC to get 100% completion AGAIN?" Usually the answer to the second question is "no" so I haven't bought many games lately.

#13 got it spot on. MP is about the quality of the game, not the skill of the players. If you're a hotshot at Halo or CoD then great, Kudos to you, but you don't need achievements to make it playable. For my money CoD4 is a perfect example of this. The MP is stellar on it, accessible to anyone, and enjoyable to all, no matter their skill level. If they were to add achievements to that experience then great, but to get the most from them they shouldn't just cater for the best of the best, but be something that is attainable by all whilst not forfitting the fun of playing the game.

I think they need tons of achievements for a game and make it to where they are 5 pts. each. But make it to where you are surprised when you get it. I know the Fable II ones are hilarious and some of them may require some skill yet some don't require any at all. I also don't care for the online cheeves, and a lot of times I don't even bother trying to get them since I don't know someone that has the game or they already have played the hell out of the game and they are done with it. It sucks.

@#51 while your trying to moan about a company using achievements as a selling point, you've then gone on to say that you don't buy games just because you want to get 100% on them, so, if not fully in the correct way, you still have actually been baited into this.

I remember a time before achievements when buying games was simple, and i still live like it, because it is simple! You buy the games you enjoy, you rent some others that you think could be ok and wanna check out, you avoid ones that are total rubbish or don't aren't you type of thing, thats all i've ever done, seems to make sense to me! And hey, while not the greatest, i've still got a pretty respectful gamerscore while doing it.

As for UFC online achievements, i'll agree they aren't the most original, but this game is goi

I cant believe that achievement have grown large enough to dictate what games people buy or how they play their games. Its honestly ridiculous. I love achievements I think that they add a whole new level of replayability to games, but when people start using the achievement system as a measure of what games they want to play it....well its plain stupid. Play the games you like and don't play what you don't like. Simple as that.

i hope codw2 dosent add online achieves cause the online was crap the single player on vet was great tho nothing like a game that puts u through hell n order 2 achieve victory u actually feel u worked and obtained something